Hey i didn't flame anyone on this board......I am the one gettin flamed and I responded....If you don't agree with what I had to say about Princess Cruise Lines, so be it....i didn't ask for agreement....I posted my thoughts on my horrible vacation so that others my take into consideration my experience with Princess before they go out and spend a whole bunch of money and then get ripped off like i have.......

Hey Ronnie.....
Me get a life huh....Sounds like you got a life by hangin out in a Cruise Review Forums and flaming people...........What a pathetic life you have.....idiot

BTW.....This will be my last visit to this forum...Take what I had to say about Princess Cruise Lines as my experience and when you consider taking a cruise with them. Thanks to the nice people who left supportive messages and emails and advice......

Yikes.sorry you had such a bad time. I have been reading this board for two yaers and this is the first rally nasty negative item I have seen.

To any new readers who are considering which cruise line to use, I would enourage you to review various member reviews on Princess. Do not take Steve's experience as the norm because it is not.

My personal example: On Dawn Princess last year, I booked a shore excursion. The morning of the excursion, the group I was in were...a bit tired....so I cancelled the excursion. When I reviewed the bill on the last morning, the excursion was till on there and I was being charged the full amount. A quick visit to the purser's office and with no questions asked, the charge was taken off. Total time lost: 5 mins.
Boomer

This guy is classic....he posts for the SOLE purpose of saying nasty, unsubstantiated things against Princess and anyone who disagrees with him....he gets angry when others post nasty things against him... as if his word is the only one anyone should believe.

Then he cries "this is the last time I post here"....like a 3 year old who doesn't get his way.

Frankly, given what he has posted and HOW he has posted, I can just envision the tantrum he displayed to the staff of his cruise ship. His 'maturity' is definitely lacking....

Life isn't perfect......and no cruise is perfect. But as others have said, it's vacation....enjoy.....look for the positive.

This guy seems to enjoy complaints, accusations and playing the martyr instead.

I agree, I have been on 8 princess cruises and had few problems and they were minor and corrected immediately wirhout making a scene. I'm leaving on an Alaska cruisetour monday and have already booked a late January Panama canal cruise - both on Princess.

Hey J Stevens.......Full Suite Princess Passenger here...What you spent for a week I spend in about 2 1/2 days....Sea Princess Nov. 2000...Balcony was full of beer bottles upon arrival. Light blown out in the shower. Light blown out in both of the table lamps in the living room. AC didn't work for the first day (West Carib) and it was hot....Carpet was not swept upon arrival in suite. All were fixed right away except for the AC which took a bit more work. I lost all of about 6 minutes getting all these things fixed. Chalk it up to experience and move on. Your complaining is ridiculous and I am very sorry Princess even gave you a 25% discount on your next cruise. I paid 'top dollar' and still had problems. I didn't get any kind of a credit for my next cruise. And you have the nerve to ask for additional credit....Your are really a super 'JERK'......Please sail on any ship except Princess. All Princess passengers will be better off without your kind.....

Thanks Sue & Bill, we ALL will be better off not meeting up with THIS GUY on any of our future sailings. I too have sailed many Princess Ships and never had any problem. Maybe this guy should try Carnival Cruise line if he thinks he had problems with Princess.

I must admit this thread was interesting. I too am in business and deal in high end sales. What I see here is a bad situation for both sides. Since J Stevens is in business seeing both sides should have been easy. You got the room category you paid for, had use of the room....Princess did offer you another room of equal size, you turned it down..you met with the Commodore...WOW. Then Princess offered you 25% off a future cruise. In YOUR business would you do this much to resolve this kind of a problem? I guess a good attitude, calm manner and a strong attempt to please comes through in HOW one communicates. When the person who has a problem conducts him/herself in a concerned BUT calm manner (not yelling & accusing) usually the problem is resolved. When one attacks & accuses in a loud voice and demands resolvement immediately then the person on the other end has to try and both calm you, get the facts, see what they can do given the choices they have and last but not least try and make you happy. It is apparent whatever the person said to you, would not make you happy UNLESS you were put in a suite, given a $800. cabin credit and a free future cruise...YOU are in business that is not how the whole thing works. I think you may always find something to complain about. NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS at the beginning of a vacation..you should resolve it quickly and no matter what never let it ruin you whole vacation whether it's a cruise or whatever...sounds to me like you wouldn't have accepted anything the cruiseline offered. Hopefully you will find a perfect cruiseline somewhere...BUT guess what ....it will cost you alot more then the $2500. or so you paid for that cruise. I truely hope you find contentment on a future vacation.

I have been reading this thread with interest and
amusement.
In my opinion, the reason these turn threads turn "nasty"
is because of the reactions of the Princess lovers/shills
etc., who respond with personal attacks against the original
poster of a negative or complaining review.
In my case it was suggested by Norm that I
a) have an axe to grind (not true)
b) worked for a competitor (not true, and illogical)
c) have attention deficit (not true, and not likely)
d) was psychotic (I do not think so)

Now if this was not nasty, I don't know what would be.
Norm also is involved in almost all the flame wars
and arguments that take place here – truly amazing.
Based on what he writes in his latenight encounters with his keyboard, one could easily jump to conclusions
about him and his personality. Indeed, I have but I will not reveal them here.

The original poster of one of these threads (at least in my case) is usually trying to point out certain problems for the benefit
of the readers and future cruisers. Then when the
replies come, which generally tend to put the blame
on the person themselves rather than look objectively
at what was being said, the person feels obliged to
respond defensively. Then on it goes!

The purpose of the boards should be for information
posting of all types, not just "cheerleading"
sales promotion and positive advertising for Princess.
Overall it is clear that although there are many positive
features of Princess cruises, there still some areas
in which there are problems or deficiencies. Resolution of
geniune mistakes, errors or other difficulties seems to be
one of these areas that Princess needs to improve.

Some people love the food/service/entertainment, some
do not, clearly differences in tastes (no pun) expectations,
opinions or standards. Why does this need to be something that
is cause for this type of response?

The original poster of this thread was obviously very unhappy, and from what was described who could blame him? He had to spend a
lot of his time trying to get things corrected. It did seem
his cruise was somewhat ruined by these experiences. Seems that he
deserves some consideration for that. How many of us would
upset to have a suitcase lost, or find an awful
stain on the cabin carpet? After having looked forward for months
to what is promoted as a fabulous vacation, pampering etc.,then having these problems occur, not having them resolved properly,
and as a result spoiling the experience, is something that would tend to make most people unhappy, even if other things, food, entertainment, islands etc. were fine

In our case we did not bother complaining to anyone, just got on with our cruise and had a very good time anyway. But the service and attitude when dealing with the purser's desk needed improvement. In general they were not too helpful, seemed as though just asking a simple question was somewhat of a bother, and overall did not display the degree of customer service one would expect, even from MacDonald's. I can only imagine how they would be with someone who was really irate.

Anyway, I would recommend that people not be quite so quick to rush to the defence of Princess, (they are not perfect) and thereby tend to blame the person who is dissatisfied. This should result in a more composed and pleasant reading experience.

And Norm, please stick to offering useful factual information from your amazing storehouse of Princess knowledge. As one who won
three of the trivia contests on the Grand,(sorry I know this should be M/V Grand Princess, written in italics), I am truly impressed with your abilities in this regard. :-))

Indeed, it is a pity that the old TV quiz show $64,000 Question is not still around. I can see it now:
And now our next contestant, Norm! His topic, Princess Cruises.
The $64,000 question: "Norm, what is the second dessert choice offered on the Tuesday night dinner menu on the Royal Princess?"

I am no Princess apologist. But I do know that anyone who starts a thread with the title "XXXX Sucks" - insert any name - is not someone most of us will take seriously. His attitude was so poor that it became very difficult for me to do so.

His biggest beef seemed to be the alleged failure of Princess to give him an upgrade - something that is totally discretionary.

I agree that lost luggage is a true problem, and he had a right to have that problem resolved. But his attitude - that EVERYTHING was bad, and his intent to get some kind of satisfaction because things weren't perfect, suggests to me that the original poster is the kind of person that is never satisfied and who looks for something to complain about.

My reaction to his posting had nothing to do with the name of the cruise line he sailed. It was with his overall attitude and demand that he was somehow entitled to this or that.......and would scream and yell until he got it.

Hey Pierre Head,
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you did NOT let the problems you had on your cruise to get in the way of enjoying your cruise, which is what everyone should do. Unfortunately this guy just did not follow that example and let the problems ruin any fun he would ordinarily been having. Look how much time he took daily to try to get some satisfaction, literally hours per day lost. I personally don't let the small stuff get in the way, just go on and enjoy, nothing is perfect, right?

Now, you have to admit that Norm sure knows his "Princess" stuff, he's a vast knowledge of information and I personally enjoy all his posts, at least I learn something with them all and I'm sure you do too?

So, have you booked your next cruise yet and if so what ship and when? I did get the feeling that you were not going to totally give up on cruiseing, I sure hope not!

If you are going to be credible, you do need to get your facts straight.

>> First, in the thread that you started, I suspect that you will be very hard-pressed to find a single post in which used a "flaming" or tone -- toward you or toward anybody else. The same is true of this thread.

>> Second, I never suggested that you had attention deficit disorder. I did did raise the other questions -- but not in a manner that was either flaming or condemnatory.

>> Third, I have hardly been in the thick of anything in this thread. I made a couple side comments, again none of which were flaming anybody.

>> Fourth, I think you will be very hard pressed to find any other examples of "flame wars" in which I have been involved. I invite you to post links if you can find any, because it might help me to learn from my mistakes if I was flaming without realizing it.

The original poster of one of these threads (at least in my case) is usually trying to point out certain problems for the benefit of the readers and future cruisers. Then when the replies come, which generally tend to put the blame
on the person themselves rather than look objectively at what was being said, the person feels obliged to respond defensively. Then on it goes!

That certainly is our common goal. The real issue here is how to handle a post that does not seem to be objective to the majority of people who read the board. I actually received private correspondence regarding the initial post in your thread before I posted in that thread, so I'm obviously not the only person who perceived that it was not objective.

In the present thread, the situation is still different. Obviously a lot of folks felt that the originator of the thread portrayed that he handled an unfortunate situation in a way that was not constructive toward resolving it, and "got what he deserved." For better or worse, they posted accordingly in the hope that it might help the originator of the thread to obtain a more satisfactory resolution when a problem arises in the future -- whether on another Princess cruise or, more likely, elsewhere.

The purpose of the boards should be for information posting of all types, not just "cheerleading" sales promotion and positive advertising for Princess. Overall it is clear that although there are many positive features of Princess cruises, there still some areas in which there are problems or deficiencies. Resolution of geniune mistakes, errors or other difficulties seems to be one of these areas that Princess needs to improve.

In case you have not noticed, I do take your comments seriously in so far as they are indicative of real problems. MV Grand Princess has some very serious design problems -- some of which I have learned through private conversatoins with Princess employees (I won't divulge the details of those conversations because I really don't want to get those employees into trouble). Princess did try to address some of the problems by modifying the design for MV Golden Princess and MV Star Princess, including a complete redesign of the main atrium and the spaces off of it, but some of the problems -- like the utter lack of "gathering space" (usually a lounge area) by the entrance to the Botticelli Dining Room -- are so inherent in the design as to be beyond all hope of correction. Additionally, it appears that Princess "raided" experienced crew and staff from that ship shortly before your cruise to staff MV Golden Princess -- and several posts also have indicated that the cuisine and the service aboard that ship have not been up to Princess's usual standards recently. I noted this very fact in a reply to <a href=http://www.cruise-forums.com/read.php?f=20&i=6188&t=6188> this post </a> just a couple days ago.

I have not exactly refrained from criticism of the "alternative dining" scams, either! In fact, it seems inevitable that cruise lines will gradually lower the quality of their main dining rooms to drive passengers to the "alternative dining" restaurants where they assess surcharges -- that is, if we tolerate such nonsense. The "premium" cruise lines advertise that their main dining rooms are "five star" restuarants, and we need to demand that they continue to provide that quality of cuisine and service. Frankly, I think that the best strategy is to boycott any "alternative restaurant" for which there's a surcharge that exceeds the amount of a tip.

And Norm, please stick to offering useful factual information from your amazing storehouse of Princess knowledge. As one who won
three of the trivia contests on the Grand,(sorry I know this should be M/V Grand Princess, written in italics), I am truly impressed with your abilities in this regard. :-))

Gee, a compliment? Albeit a bit backhanded....

Indeed, it is a pity that the old TV quiz show $64,000 Question is not still around. I can see it now:
And now our next contestant, Norm! His topic, Princess Cruises.
The $64,000 question: "Norm, what is the second dessert choice offered on the Tuesday night dinner menu on the Royal Princess?"

If you are going to be credible, you do need to get your facts straight.

>> Second, I never suggested that you had attention deficit disorder

That is not what I said.

From my last post:
In my case it was suggested by Norm that I
a) have an axe to grind (not true)
b) worked for a competitor (not true, and illogical)
c) have attention deficit (not true, and not likely)
d) was psychotic (I do not think so)

Note the absence of the word "disorder" in my post.

Pasted directly from the previous thread:

Author: Norm (---.beld.net)
Date: 06-23-01 23:31

SAINTVIE,

I would not be so quick to write off Princess on at least three scores.

>> First, the style of Pierre Head's original post is typical of people who either have an axe to grind (i. e. he works for a competitor and is posting this with the intent of disparaging Princess to drive business elsewhere) or one of those "attention deficit" individuals who's so psychotic as to disparage everything in the hope of getting more attention for himself.

Facts & credibility?
Et tu Brute!

Flaming:
>> Fourth, I think you will be very hard pressed to find any other examples of "flame wars" in which I have been involved. I invite you to post links if you can find any, because it might help me to learn from my mistakes if I was flaming without realizing it.

Perhaps I used the wrong meaning of the word flame. Nevertheless, in answer to this see the above. Flame or nasty, call it what you will, these were your words.

And, without quoting the original posts, I can remember (again indicating a lack of attention deficit), as examples, arguments about formal dress for dining, alternative dining options (the word "suckers" comes to mind), charges for ice cream, and being pedantic about arcane terminology (Personal Choice Dining) for which you were rightly criticized by Kuki.

Readers should not take criticism of Princess to be criticism of themselves or their preferences. This might be understandable in the case of those who have direct financial interests (such as in your case owning P&O stock), but then their posts can be taken for what they are worth.

I have not exactly refrained from criticism of the "alternative dining" scams, either!

Very true!

In fact, it seems inevitable that cruise lines will gradually lower the quality of their main dining rooms to drive passengers to the "alternative dining" restaurants where they assess surcharges --

Unlikely, at least with the present set-up. There is not enough room in the alternatives to accommodate large numbers.

that is, if we tolerate such nonsense. The "premium" cruise lines advertise that their main dining rooms are "five star" restuarants, and we need to demand that they continue to provide that quality of cuisine and service.

I agree, but it strange that when people point out the deficits in this area, that they are not anywhere near a "5-star" restaurant either in the food or the service, they are accused of being "psychotic", or never satisfied or too picky or whatever. Many posts like this.
This name-calling is what gets the "nastiness" started.

Frankly, I think that the best strategy is to boycott any
"alternative restaurant" for which there's a surcharge that exceeds the amount of a tip.

Fine, you do not have to go, but is there any need to call people who choose to visit them "suckers"?

I did not like the charge for the ice-cream, so I did not pay it. But I saw many who did, and were seemingly quite pleased. It is all about choice.

My feelings are:
best plan – no charge at alternative restaurant or for ice cream
next best plan: alternative restaurant/ ice cream with charge.
worst plan: no alternative restaurant or ice cream.

In case you have not noticed, I do take your comments seriously in so far as they are indicative of real problems

I had noticed that certain people had begun to mirror my initial comments about the Grand at least during that time frame, but I had refrained from sending "I told you so" posts.
So I felt vindicated somewhat, but it still does not excuse the way in which people tend to blame the person who points out the problems.

Hey Pierre Head,
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you did NOT let the problems you had on your
cruise to get in the way of enjoying your cruise, which is what everyone should do.

And I said that in my initial post, and even followed up with the fact that we won some prizes for trivia and other things, hardly a sign that we were just dissatisfied malcontents but it did not stop some from saying it was all my own fault!

Unfortunately
this guy just did not follow that example and let the problems ruin any fun he would ordinarily
been having. Look how much time he took daily to try to get some satisfaction, literally hours
per day lost.

Yes, but certainly the Princess people did not seem to be too helpful, that was my point.

Now, you have to admit that Norm sure knows his "Princess" stuff, he's a vast knowledge of
information and I personally enjoy all his posts, at least I learn something with them all and
I'm sure you do too?

Yes he's great when it comes to providing factual details. But not so good when it comes to casting aspersions on those who criticize his beloved Princess, or acting as a Princess cheerleader. Since he owns stock in P&O, this is a clear conflict of interest, and cannot be considered as truly objective.

So, have you booked your next cruise yet and if so what ship and when? I did get the feeling that
you were not going to totally give up on cruiseing, I sure hope not!

We have not given up on cruising, but are not cruise addicts. We prefer to do different things on our vacations each time. But I expect that we will take another cruise in 2 or 3 years time, probably to Alaska. But we will try another cruise line for a change and to do our own comparisons. Have been on Princess, Carnival and Canadian Pacific. Carnival was 20 years ago when we enjoyed the "party atmosphere", but may not like it as much now!
CP was not a cruise as such, but a true transatlantic transportation trip. So we need to try one of the others.

See my response to Norm. BTW, Norm hardly needs anyone to defend him, he is quite capable of that himself!
Also, see my response to Donna.

I am no Princess apologist. But I do know that anyone who starts a thread with the title "XXXX
Sucks" - insert any name - is not someone most of us will take seriously. His attitude was so
poor that it became very difficult for me to do so.

I understand, but chastising him at that time was only likely
to make matters worse!

His biggest beef seemed to be the alleged failure of Princess to give him an upgrade - something
that is totally discretionary.

I know, but again, why add fuel to the fire? Just let him vent.
That is in part what these boards are for.

I agree that lost luggage is a true problem, and he had a right to have that problem resolved.

And the poor condition of the cabin he did get.

But his attitude - that EVERYTHING was bad, and his intent to get some kind of satisfaction
because things weren't perfect,

suggests to me that the original poster is the kind of person
that is never satisfied and who looks for something to complain about.

See, there you go making a blanket assumption and statement about him over this one thing.
He may be a decent person in reality (as I think I am, but you would not think so from the responses to my post about our experiences on the Grand) just really really mad about these issues. Maybe he is not and you are in fact right, but the point is nobody really knows, and so it is best not make these kinds of remarks. It does no good, and starts all the "nastiness."

That was the gist of my reply to Norm's "nastiness" post in this thread that referred to nastiness in the thread I started in June. The things he wrote about me based on my post were totally out of line and uncalled for. I initially ignored it, but decided to remind him of it as a result of his post about the current nastiness. Basically, it was a "people in glass houses" post from me to him.

My reaction to his posting had nothing to do with the name of the cruise line he sailed. It was
with his overall attitude and demand that he was somehow entitled to this or that.......and would
scream and yell until he got it.

But did this effect you personally? I hope not.
I am not trying to defend him, he seemed to have too many problems all at once, and perhaps did not have the patience and personal skills to deal with them. And given the anticipation of looking forward to wonderful vacation, for which he paid a lot of money then the the confusion with the cabin numbers, it is easy to see how some normally rational and sane person might react angrily. Rather, I am pointing out that these threads get prolonged as a result of the responses that come, and all the other people who feel the need to put the blame on the person with the problems. Then he feels like he's being kicked when he is down, by the mob.

Don't people see what really starts the nastiness? It's not the original post, its the subsequent responses. It has happened many times when someone posts a complaint about something or other.

>> First, the style of Pierre Head's original post is typical of people who either have an axe to grind (i. e. he works for a competitor and is posting this with the intent of disparaging Princess to drive business elsewhere) or one of those "attention deficit" individuals who's so psychotic as to disparage everything in the hope of getting more attention for himself. *(you, quoting me)

You're right -- I had forgotten using the term "attention deficit" -- which probably was not the right term anyway.

I agree, but it strange that when people point out the deficits in this area, that they are not anywhere near a "5-star" restaurant either in the food or the service, they are accused of being "psychotic", or never satisfied or too picky or whatever. Many posts like this.
This name-calling is what gets the "nastiness" started.

The primary factor drew questions as to motivation, etc., to your posts in the earlier thread was the overall negative tenor. Your comments ranged from saying that certain aspects were "okay" (which came across as meaning "tolerable") to outright disparaging. Perhaps you were simply in a rare mood at the time (I'm willing to make allowances), but the rest of us were simply trying to sort out what was really happening. The fact that your post was the first one to point to major problems aboard MV Grand Princess -- after a long chain of posts about cruises aboard the same vessel had been very positive -- probably made it even more suspicious. The rest of us now have a different perspective, and can see it as a turning point indicating the beginning of a new -- and very unfortunate -- trend.

In any case, I would not apply the term "name calling" to a speculative conjecture of possible diagnosis on the part of somebody who does have the professional training and qualifications to recognize such conditions and to make referrals where indicated.

Fine, you do not have to go, but is there any need to call people who choose to visit them "suckers"?

I'm sorry if a poor attempt at humor came across the wrong way -- and I know that you are not the only person who took it in a way other than the way in which I intended it. BTW, did you hear about the magazine advertisement that promised to send the secret to success to anybody who would mail in $10? Those who sent in the money received a card with a fishhook attached to it in the mail a couple weeks later. On the card appeared the words, "Fish for suckers."

I agree completely that Princess should eliminate the extra charge for ice cream aboard the newer ships (BTW, there's still no charge for ice cream during the day aboard MV Royal Princess) and also the charges for all alternative restaurants. I guess I really can't complain about charges that are the equivalent of a gratuity at alternative restaurants, but any more than about $3.50 seems excessive.

>
> You're right -- I had forgotten using the term "attention
> deficit" -- which probably was not the right term anyway.

Thank you!
>
>
> The primary factor drew questions as to motivation, etc., to
> your posts in the earlier thread was the overall negative
> tenor. Your comments ranged from saying that certain aspects
> were "okay" (which came across as meaning "tolerable")

actually meant "met my expectations"

>to outright disparaging.
Some of the areas were very poor, and needed disparaging!

>Perhaps you were simply in a rare mood
> at the time

No, I always try to be very objective, and stick where
possible to the facts. As I have said before, we were
not angry or whatever. We did have a good time, and enjoyed
it anyway, without complaining to anyone. I did not write my
review until some after the cruise, so that I could have time
for reflection and consideration, and choose my words carefully without shooting from the hip, so to speak.

(I'm willing to make allowances),
Gee, thanks!

> The fact that your post was the first one to point to major
> problems aboard MV Grand Princess -- after a long
> chain of posts about cruises aboard the same vessel had been
> very positive -- probably made it even more suspicious.

But that was the major gist of my post. The cruise did
not come up to my expectations based on what had been
posted here, as well as what we had experienced previously on the Crown. How was I to know that certain things had changed, probably making comparisons invalid. We were
comparing apples with oranges.

> The rest of us now have a different perspective, and can see it
> as a turning point indicating the beginning of a new -- and
> very unfortunate -- trend.

Goes to show the perils of the tendency on this board to
blame the person who points out the problems. As I said
before, a case of the Emperor's Clothes, or the Wizard of Oz.
>
> In any case, I would not apply the term "name calling" to a
> speculative conjecture of possible diagnosis on the part of
> somebody who does have the professional training and
> qualifications to recognize such conditions and to make
> referrals where indicated.

I do not know of anyone with such qualifications
who would even consider making such a blanket
assumption on the basis of a post on an internet board.
Speculative conjecture has no place in any kind of
professional clinical diagnosis. Such diagnoses can
only be made after much careful study, in a one-on
one situation.
Do you have an MD with specialization in Psychiatry,
or perhaps a Ph.D. in Counseling or Clinical Psychology?
I bet the answer is no, because nobody with such genuine
qualifications would make such statements.

So it does reduce to name-calling after all.
But, I must admit that you are far from being the
worst culprit in this regard.
>
So what about the question of your being involved in
several other arguments that you challenged me to
find? Am I correct there also?

Anyway, I appreciate your response, and the much better
non-incitive tone.
>
>
> Actually, the truth is that it depends which Tuesday....

Sounds like you have been taking lessons from the Clinton/Condit
School of Evasive Answers!

You - a manager? Are you? While you may have the responsibility of ten multi-million dollar accounts, it's pretty evident that you lack the ability to manage. You clearly could not manage or harness your anger over issues, that for the most part, were more or less nuisuance items. (And I can appreciate the fact that nuisuance items are what gets most of us in a tizzy). I, too, expect, appreciate, and welcome cleanliness, the timely arrival of luggage, etc. I also like having everything fall into place as I expect and more importantly "want" it to ... as I strongly suspect we all do. But unfortunately, life is not always that perfect and adjustments have to made. The one thing I have learned and continue to be more cognizant of is "don't sweat the small stuff". And the truth of the matter is - most of what any of us get aggravated over is "small stuff". Your vacation was not ruined by the events you described - it was ruined by your inability to be flexibile and to roll with the punches.

Try as I may - I can't possibly know how you feel and I won't even pretend that I do, because to you - these concerns were clearly BIG PROBLEMS. But what I have observed is that you completely lost a week in your life that you can NEVER ever get back! You went on a cruise vacation, a privilege few will ever experience, and for six out of seven days - you basked in your own misery. How sad.

I hope you are not angered by this writing, but rather hope that you will reflect upon it. And for whatever it's worth, I sincerely hope you find some recourse to erase or diminish your nightmarish experience.